Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 316

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Are the presynaptic membrane particles the calcium channels?

Open access
Pumplin, D W, Reese, T S, Llinás, R·1981·Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

Abstract

The number of large intramembrane particles associated with sites of synaptic vesicle release at the squid giant synapse was determined and compared to the average maximal presynaptic calcium current in order to derive an estimate of the conductance each particle would have if it were a calcium channel. This value, 0.21 pS, compares favorably with conductances of calcium channels in other preparations, substantiating the idea that the large intramembrane particles, which are concentrated at "active zones," represent calcium channels.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1073/pnas.78.11.7210

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 316

Metadata

Authors
Pumplin, D. W., Reese, T. S., & Llinás, R.
Venue
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
Published
1981-11
Volume
78
Issue
11
Pages
7210-7213
ISSN
  • 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
  • 1091-6490
OpenAlex
W2093441174
Cited by
316
References
0
FWCI
4.23
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Are the presynaptic membrane particles the calcium channels? https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1073/pnas.78.11.7210
The paper
Pumplin, D. W., Reese, T. S., & Llinás, R. (1981). Are the presynaptic membrane particles the calcium channels? Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.78.11.7210

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.